Problem #1 - Knowing what you know from your review of arbitration in the employment setting, consider the following arbitration agreement entered into by Penny Paulson and her employer, Feastaurant, Inc. as part of Pennys acceptance of employment with Feastaurant:

Penny Paulson (Employee) and Feastuarant, Inc. (Employer) hereby agree as follows:

Any dispute arising between Employee and Employer related to the employment relationship may not be filed in Court, but rather shall be heard before a panel of three arbitrators. The Employee and Employer shall each select a single arbitrator to preside over the dispute and the two arbitrators selected will agree on a third arbitrator. All arbitrators shall be selected from a list prepared by Employer. After an arbitration panel is selected, Employee shall submit a list of all witnesses that will testify at the hearing. The hearing may be audio or digitally recorded, but only by Employer. Employer may modify this arbitration agreement at any time. In the event Employee prevails, under no circumstances will Employer be required to reinstate Employee. Finally, Employer may cancel this arbitration agreement in its entirety at any time.

Based on what you understand about mandatory arbitration clauses, what (if any) problems do you see with the clause above?

Problem #2 - Take a look at the Mary Kay Independent Beauty Consultant Agreement associated with this assignment. Read through and analyze the general terms and conditions and explain whether you believe that this agreement would lead a court to conclude an Independent Beauty Consultant is an independent contractor or an employee. Provide your interpretation of several provisions of the agreement in support of your conclusion.

This is a ten point question. Be sure to provide ten points worth of analysis for full marks.

Problem #3 - Bonnie Beauchamp, a fifty-two year old woman, has worked for the Jefferson State University campus bookstore for more than 20 years. A retired librarian, she began working for the bookstore when it was owned and operated exclusively by JSU. In 2010, JSU entered into an agreement with a national bookseller, Burns & Global (B & G), pursuant to which B & G would lease the business from JSU and operate the campus bookstore. According to the terms of the agreement, the bookstore remained in its location on campus and relied on JSUs provision of utilities and maintenance. B & G handled their own business records (inventory, orders, equipment) and set its own salaries for employees, but relied on JSU for issuing payroll checks and withholdings. Campus bookstore employees continued to enjoy health insurance benefits provided by JSU. Bookstore employees could be hired and fired at the discretion of B & G. Pursuant to the agreement, all managers were brought in from B & Gs other stores but B & G retained many of the employees originally hired by JSU. In 2013, Bonnie is terminated. She believes the basis of her termination was her age which is a violation of federal law.

Analyze these facts under the integrated enterprise test set forth in ELHRP. Discuss each of these elements and determine whether you think Bonnie will be able to maintain an action against JSU and B & G for wrongful termination. Consistent with your readings in Chapter 2, your answer should focus on the relationship between JSU and B & G and whether Bonnie could sue both of them. Do not focus on the discrimination claim itself.

Problem #4 - Sally Sanders, a woman, applies for a job for which she is highly qualified. Prior to entering the conference room in which her interview will be conducted, she overhears the interviewer and other managers make disparaging remarks about women. Her interview goes smoothly, but she is not hired. When she inquires with the interviewer several weeks later, he advises Sally that she was less qualified than the male candidate the company ultimately hired. Because she knows the male candidate from prior contacts in the industry, Sally knows that she has better educational credentials and more relevant work experience. She believes she didnt get the job because of bias and wants to initiate a lawsuit.

Based on your readings, identify the type of discrimination that has occurred (i.e., disparate treatment, adverse impact, or retaliation). Apply the facts to the appropriate test set forth in ELHRP and state the elements of Sallys prima facie case against the company. Next, identify what the company would have to allege in order to shift the burden back to Sally. Finally, explain how Sally could rebut the companys assertions. Based on your assessment, who wins? Remember, Im grading the appropriateness of your analysis and whether youve supported your conclusion not on the your conclusion alone.